CC_Minutes_2009_0720 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday, July 20, 2009 Page 11 velopment moved forward, an environmental review and past ownership history would be helpful; however, he questioned whether researching this information would be cost-effective all at once, or based on a more project-specific need. Councilmember Roe suggested researching preliminary information on property ownership of specific parcels; and a summary of environmental conditions if available. Councilmember Pust noted the existence of some reports made available to the City; however suggested that at the time the property is developed, title work would be completed by the developer and would not be a cost to be borne by the City, nor needing to be completed at this time. Councilmember Pust opined that the only action needed by the City was to write into their processes that they be allowed access to those title records, and to make that language a condition to fu- ture developer agreements. Councilmember Ihlan referenced page 8 of the attorney memo laying out possible next steps; and focused on #l.a and b in determining responsible parties past and present; and suggested hiring someone to perform this environmental review at a cost not to exceed $20 - 40,000 in order to protect claims going forward and lev- erage people to share environmental information. Councilmember Ihlan opined that this was a minimal cost and should be accomplished now before the City was in the midst of a proposed development. City Attorney Jay Squires noted that the City wore two hats: regulatory and/or owner for properties as development occurred in Twin Lakes. Attorney Squires provided additional detail the City played based on these respective roles; the regulatory role of the City requiring developers to investigate and remediate envi- ronmental issues at their cost, with the City unconcerned about how, but with the final goal of clean property; and options the City needed to consider when they wore the ownership hat and determining the depth and nature of contamination and possible avenues for recovery of costs for clean up of those contaminants. Attorney Squires used the example of the Mounds View School District Office site; and opined that, while it would be good to have no remaining contamination on any property in the Twin Lakes area, the question was whether it was appro- priate for the City to spend money now, or on a project by project basis, requiring that information be provided and contamination resolved on those properties not acquired by the City. Councilmember Roe clarified, in a regulatory role with a private developer re- sponsible for clean up, if they requested funds through the Hazardous Substance District and the City requested grant funds on their behalf, then the City would be involved, and may represent a situation when the City wasn't simply an owner or serving in a regulatory role.